The Art of Attacking Football

[herne79]

It's really easy to get sucked into the Match Of The Day way in which "formations" are presented in the media.

That absolutely nails it for me.

I've been banging on about this in my 4-4-2 thread since I moved one of my strikers down to AMCR from STCR. It's how players actually interact on the pitch that is far more important than some chalk board formation.

[Clifton]

All well and good, but maybe the 'Tactics Creator' should start with something other than "some chalk board formation" then?

Impossible to argue with the expertise of Cleon, RTH etc, nor the effort they put in to help, but the effort required to even match the real world performance of your chosen team is too much for me (many hours and restarts later), let alone somehow exceeding their performance. I think it is interesting that many club threads seem less well supported than in previous years. Might this be because the enjoyment of squad building and getting your team to overachieve is no longer so attainable in FM16? Tactics are the be all and end all. That is fine for those who like it that way, but it does seem to narrow the options for those wanting a broader more rounded game.

[Cleon]

Not really the thread for a moan. If you want to give feedback about something that isn't about attacking football and is game feedback and issues you see, then use the correct forum. It's pointless posting it in here.

[RTHerringbone]

All well and good, but maybe the 'Tactics Creator' should start with something other than "some chalk board formation" then?

What would you suggest? A clear alternative isn't overly obvious, but it is still surprising that relatively few people appear to realise that the "chalk board" formation is a rough approximation of defensive shape in FM. Maybe an option is simply to somehow make that more transparent in the TC?

I think it is interesting that many club threads seem less well supported than in previous years. Might this be because the enjoyment of squad building and getting your team to overachieve is no longer so attainable in FM16? Tactics are the be all and end all. That is fine for those who like it that way, but it does seem to narrow the options for those wanting a broader more rounded game.

It's more likely down to the natural migration away from forums into social media. The amount of FM related content that floats around on Twitter (which in turn promotes YouTube, Facebook, Twitch and all sorts of other stuff I have no clue about) has really grown in the past 2/3 years.

[2calvin]

Post 4 was a Eureka moment for me and boy is my team benefiting. Thanks

[iamneallyons]

What would you suggest? A clear alternative isn't overly obvious, but it is still surprising that relatively few people appear to realise that the "chalk board" formation is a rough approximation of defensive shape in FM. Maybe an option is simply to somehow make that more transparent in the TC?

It's more likely down to the natural migration away from forums into social media. The amount of FM related content that floats around on Twitter (which in turn promotes YouTube, Facebook, Twitch and all sorts of other stuff I have no clue about) has really grown in the past 2/3 years.

Would it be stupid of me to suggest maybe having two screens - a with the ball formation and a without the ball formation? rather than just the one "chalkboard'esq" screen?

[johnnyyakuza78]

It used to be a lot clearer when there was arrows!

[RTHerringbone]

Any return to wibble wobble (it was made redundant 10 years ago for a reason) is probably best placed in another thread.

[iamneallyons]

Any return to wibble wobble (it was made redundant 10 years ago for a reason) is probably best placed in another thread.

i do see it on social media requested quite a lot though!

but yeah for another thread.

[Cleon]

Can we stick to the topic? If it's not about this thread and attacking football then please don't post. It's annoying putting effort into a thread then people discuss something completely different in the thread.

[Cleon]

Remember that there is an update in post 4

[SperoM]

Once again a great topic. I've been testing out attacking tactics for a bit now to try and continue my own topic, but so far haven't really seen much success. I'll have to compare what I started with to this and maybe try to apply some of the information provided to fix things up.

Just out of curiosity though, especially when implementing a 4-2-3-1, what are your thoughts on a staggered midfield with a DM and a CM? So for example a DM (S) partnered with a CM (S)/B2B (S). The rest of the system might be fairly 'common' say with a IF (S) on the left and a IF (A) on the right with an AM in the middle wingbacks, etc.

[KongeMeier]

Remember that there is an update in post 4

I'll do it for you, Cleon!

@iamneallyons: I think a 'thank you' here would be appropiate!? You got a complete write-up on your tactic and suggestions on how to start to fix it.

[roggiotis]

Even with the updated roles in post 4 i think is very risky playing attacking especially in the right side ( WM-A).

Perhaps DWs may be better , but why to use them ?

A more logical move would be the WBs , and maybe iamneallyons had in his mind that shape while they are on attack ? so CWBs ?

Also i don't really know if the 2 CDs and a sweeper split like the 3 CDs do.

[iamneallyons]

I'll do it for you, Cleon!

@iamneallyons: I think a 'thank you' here would be appropiate!? You got a complete write-up on your tactic and suggestions on how to start to fix it.

You don't need to do anything, iv been busy since I finished work and not seen any update - I will look further back up the thread now.

[iamneallyons]

Badly Designed Tactics

The Shape

The shape is based on the Ajax team from 1995. Now the shape you see on the tactics screen is your defensive shape, so already you can see some issues right? Now factor into to this the roles and duties used in the system as well. And you can see the car crash that’s waiting to happen. It’s worth noting that the tactic is on an attacking mentality and uses a fluid team shape.

You can use this shape and be successful but for me it comes under the category of specialist tactics. What I mean by this is, classic tactics that aren’t popular and are difficult to create at the best of times. One of the reasons for this is the shape you use and the settings are only part of the issue. It’s a system that requires specific players, so is a long-term project and not something you can expect to get working quickly. It requires a certain type of squad building and player developing so it works like you’d expect. A bit like what I wrote about with the Arsenal Invincible stuff I wrote about.

If we now focus on the roles used in the setup we can see it’s very top-heavy and attacked focus. The front four is all attacking, this means the players will always be high up the pitch regardless. This in turn reduces space the players have to play in and makes any kind of movement hard to achieve. Also take into account he is playing as Juventus, this means that most teams will sit deep against them and look to hit them on the counter. The overall shape is very vulnerable to counter attacks anyway, especially with the exposure of the wings. There is absolutely no cover at all.

The midfield is also an issue and opens them up to quick counters because they’re focused on going forward and dropping back. Dropping back is good but does he need to congest the final third even more? He already has four players in those areas and adding another two is just overkill. However the real issue with the midfield can be seen from this quote by the creator of the tactic;

This is just pure suicidal, why? When the box to box midfielders go out to the wings, who then covers the centre? The defensive midfielder who is an anchorman will be run ragged. There is no way one player can do his own job and take on the responsibilities of two other players, it’s not possible. The entire centre is opened up and has zero cover when the box to box midfielders track the wide players.

His defensive side of the tactic isn’t that bad in all honesty, at least from the back four perspective. It’s the players in front of those players who are the main issue.

To highlight all of this I will use my Santos side who are the best team in the world currently on this save. So you can see the quality of players used is of a high standard so these effects will worsen with players less able.

Team Instructions

Those are the team instructions used. He uses roles that dribble a lot yet asked the teams to dribble less, why? He’s also asked players to stick to positions yet he needs players to move about as there is lots of space that players have to cover. So these two team instructions don’t make much sense. Then we have pass into space which increases through balls. However where is the space in the final third going to come from, to be able to do this consistently? The space is limited already so there is no space for balls to be played into, let alone his players getting on the end of them.

So in short the immediate issues are;

• Lack of space
  
• Lack of movement
  
• No intelligent play
  
• Overly aggressive roles
  
• Midfield set up is terrible
  
• No cover
  
• Wings are exposed
  
• No real runners from deep
  
• No variation of play
  
• Predictable
  

Those are the key points that are wrong with the above setup up initially. However just saying they are issues without showing examples isn’t really helpful, so here we go.

I’ve mentioned this before but I’ll mention it again. If you are really aggressive with your attack and extremely defensive with your defensive players then the team is split into two separate teams like the image above. The opposition’s keeper had the ball and my own players have had time to retreat for a good three or four seconds yet are still really advanced. Look at the box to box midfielders too, totally abandoning the deep central areas. It makes it easier for the opposition to dominate these kind of areas.

This is still the same move but at the point where the goalkeeper has now released the ball. Look at the pressure the anchor man has to deal with. He has five players he has to be responsible for due to the box to box midfielders being too advanced and the inside forwards unable to get into any kind of useful position. In fact, there is still six players behind the ball due to it dropping into the space behind the box to box midfielders. It’s far too much for one person to deal with.

In order to fix this you have a lot of options you could take. Those being;

Change the roles of the midfield duo. Why do you need them to go forward when you already have four players to attack ahead of them? What you change them to would be more static/less adventurous roles. You get overrun in the middle currently so you’d want to look at roles such as;

• CM Support
  
• DLP defend or support.
  

Those two roles would offer much better balance and keep the central areas protected better.

Another thing to consider here is using at least one of the inside forwards as a support duty rather than an attacking one. This will allow him to help out more and be deeper in defence and it will also give you variety in attack in those situations. After all you want the team to be a cohesive unit don’t you. rather than a team split into two teams?

This is another example of losing the ball and having three players immediately took out of the game. The anchor man is having to leave his position to deal with it as the opposition have three players about to overload this near side. It’s like your front four are spectators for most parts bar on the odd occasion one of the inside forward might be able to track someone. Although those kind of scenarios are nowhere near often enough.

People get hung up on the overall shape you see on the tactics screen. Remember that is only the defensive shape, what’s important is the shape you see when attacking! So what if we can keep the attacking intent of the original tactic but make it better and more realistic to fit the modern game?

I’m going tostop short of writing about a full new tactic as I don’t want to make it too easy but to give you a general idea of what I’m talking about, how about something like this;

Wide Midfielders!! But I wanted inside forwards. They’re actually set up to be inside forwards because the wide midfielder role is very customisable. They have the instructions get further forward, cuts inside with the ball and dribble more activated. This allows the same behaviour as in the original system. In fact all that will change is how they behave when your side doesn’t have possession. You’ll be more solid and they’ll contribute more from a defensive view compared to using them in the AML/R strata. You lose absolutely nothing in an attacking sense and is the reason why you should consider this instead.

I’ve also changed some of the other roles just to highlight how more solid it looks and more potent in attack. This isn’t a suggested tactic or roles though, I’ve used it just to highlight how simple changes can make a big difference in the overall behaviour of the players.

The wide midfielders are still attacking but now they actually have space to play in and are harder to mark due to their starting positions being much lower than usual. They can now draw players out and be more involved in both the build up and defensive phases. They’re no longer just bystanders during certain phases of play.

Even though they are now wide midfielders I’ve still labelled them as inside forwards on the screenshot because that’s essentially what they are. But look at how deep they are compared to using players in the AML/R strata would be like. They are deeper now and this allows the three central players to stay more compact and protect the middle of the pitch because they aren’t being stretched wide by-play.

I could go on and give more examples but I think I’ve made my point quite clear now and can concentrate on the 3-4-3 again in the next update and talk about the defensive side of that.

Thanks Cleon, really appreciated.

Couple of questions..

The inside forwards or now wide midfielder roles, could they be set as wingers one on support, one on attack? Wouod that stretch the opposition more or would it maybe leave the middle of the field to isolated?

Team instructions - valid points regarding these, did you alter/remove the instructions you pointed out?

Finally, shape and mentality - did you or would you adjust the shape or keep it fluid? Or does shape not really play a massive factor at this point? Assume you kept attacking mentality as it fits with this specific thread.

Seriously though, thanks for the response I appreciate it. I'm giving it a good go at educating myself more by various suggested sources now and do honestly feel I'm grasping things much better - been reading the hand of God's handbook, just a simple read through the first few sections of how or where you place your defensive line and how it effects where your midfield and attack will sit and start a transition (attack to defend or defend to attack) has helped a lot!

I will get there eventually, hopefully!

[fmjeros]

Regarding the formation that came up i suggest you read those articles that will certainly help you know how they played

http://spielverlagerung.com/2015/08/23/hoffenheim-bayern-munich-costa-key-as-bayern-struggle-against-intensity/

http://spielverlagerung.com/2015/12/29/1995-cl-final-afc-ajax-ac-milan-10/

As Cleon already pointed out the wingers play in the midfield strata and not in the AM. The most important part of this system is the diamond of the midfielders, especially the 2 central midfielders will have to work together with the wingers and if you go with bbm's this isn't going to happen. they will surge forward at every opportunity something that you don't want. They need to be in half spaces between the lines and the central area. Yes i would play with wingers to strech the opposition but it all depends on the players you have. Remember that it is a very very specialized formation and you need the right players to pull it off. I suggest you take over Bayern and have a go with them and try it out, otherwise you need a long term save bringing the right players.

[iamneallyons]

The long term save could be a great idea, something to completely throw myself into and enjoy trying to get it right.

Cleons post is great and along with that and other bits and pieces iv take to reading and educating myself more the last few days I'm confident I could at least do a better job!

[Cleon]

This video from Rahidi about the dark arts of attacking football is a must watch. It's fantastic;

[video=youtube;wfz8yLC_Sbk]

[callamity]

This video from Rahidi about the dark arts of attacking football is a must watch. It's fantastic;

[video=youtube;wfz8yLC_Sbk]

Thanks cleon.

Been looking forward to this as well.

[Clifton]

Agree it's excellent - particularly helpful to start getting a handle on transitions. Video is the best way to see how they work.

[higgins]

Nice thread Cleon, I'm tempted to bring some concepts from this into my flat 4-4-2, in particular I'm intrigued by your midfield duo: a b2b and a regista, but probably it would too ambitious for a 4-4-2 that already employs two attacking wingers.

[alinp]

Nice thread Cleon, I'm tempted to bring some concepts from this into my flat 4-4-2, in particular I'm intrigued by your midfield duo: a b2b and a regista, but probably it would too ambitious for a 4-4-2 that already employs two attacking wingers.

As I see it, he can play that midfield pair because he has 3 CD's, hence the extra security.

[higgins]

As I see it, he can play that midfield pair because he has 3 CD's, hence the extra security.

Yep, that and the wingbacks surely add defensive stability.

[alinp]

Yep, that and the wingbacks surely add defensive stability.

Hmm... possibly, but note they're both Attacking in an Attacking tactic. I would say the WB's main purpose is to provide width, hence they may defend the flanks, but are unlikely to help if you have a defensively weak central midfield. It really is the 3 CD's that allow the Reg/BBM midfield.

[Cleon]

Hmm... possibly, but note they're both Attacking in an Attacking tactic. I would say the WB's main purpose is to provide width, hence they may defend the flanks, but are unlikely to help if you have a defensively weak central midfield. It really is the 3 CD's that allow the Reg/BBM midfield.

It's more down to me playing aggressive and playing a risky kind of game. Although have 3 central defenders means it's less risky.

[alinp]

It's more down to me playing aggressive and playing a risky kind of game. Although have 3 central defenders means it's less risky.

Yes, that's the point I'm trying to make. Your 3 CD's mitigate the risk.

I'm amazed (well possibly not) how many commenting on the CM 's seem to be blind to this.

[iamneallyons]

This video from Rahidi about the dark arts of attacking football is a must watch. It's fantastic;

[video=youtube;wfz8yLC_Sbk]

Will give this a watch lager on today, just watched Leicester do city!

[alinp]

Will give this a watch lager on today, just watched Leicester do city!

Ok, but you do realise that had nothing to do with the subject of this thread?

[gunnerfan]

This video from Rahidi about the dark arts of attacking football is a must watch. It's fantastic;

[video=youtube;wfz8yLC_Sbk]

Thanks so much, Rashidi. Great stuff.

[SperoM]

This video from Rahidi about the dark arts of attacking football is a must watch. It's fantastic;

[video=youtube;wfz8yLC_Sbk]

Yep, I was getting into a bit of a funk in my second season toward the end with Liverpool. After watching this (and reading this topic) I adjusted my 4-2-3-1 control to be an attacking 4-4-1-1 and it has worked wonders. Really I think before this edition of FM I was kind of a sheep in terms of following whatever the community and posted popular tactics were doing with some tweaks of my own. Now that I've found this with the insight from guys like you and Rahidi I've been able to completely do away with previous misconceptions and build real, solid tactics. There are not enough superlatives to describe how helpful you all are for those of us willing to read and listen.

[wereldbol]

will read this tremendous article later this week when i've got a bit more time but i'd like to quickly add that i simply can not express in words exactly how much i am looking forward to your brazilian box article for 2016.

[the_Kabaka]

Thanks for all of these Cleon, really useful, feel like I'm starting to get a handle on the game and that there's some logic behind the things I'm trying to do.

That being said, after reading the Arts of possession and Arts of attacking football, and watching the Dark Arts video, I'm struggling and can no longer see why. Is there any insight you can give me?

The idea is that my first defensive block is made up of the two centre-backs and a defensive midfielder. A previous attempt at playing with three centre-backs led to players playing on top of each other and was overkill. I initially had the CBs as ball-playing defenders but decided this was overkill as the team are already playing a fairly short (mixed) passing game.

The two wing-backs are then set on support in order to assist the first defensive block when going back but also to provide an option to the midfield going forward. Decided against giving them an attack duty in order that they're available more often to help out in defence.

The box to box midfielder is there to bridge the gap between midfield and attack, supporting both as necessary, interlinking with the roaming playmaker who I'm looking to to play key passes. I actually found in this setup the defensive midfielder still gets involved to help recycle possession even though he's on a defensive setting.

As I'll explain in a bit, we're looking to play short, passing, fluid, narrow football so up to the two wide men are set to playing as Raumdeuters, in order to give them the freedom to cut inside, find the space and provide an attacking threat. Therefore my striker is a deep-lying forward with support so that he drops back a bit and can look to play them in, supported by the two central midfielders behind him.

On to the team instructions

Starting with team shape, I went with fluid. This actually seems to work pretty well even though the formation isn't that 'top heavy'. The CBs will often come forward to sweep up, the DM occassionally gets involved in recycling the ball in possession and it gives the forwards some creative freedom. To counter-balance this, plus the two raumdeuters, we're playing a balanced game (maybe this should be narrower?). In order to help us play possession football, there's a high defensive line paired with much more closing down to try and help us win the ball back quickly. To help our passing game that's complimented with retain possession. I did have 'play out of defence' on but for some reason our defence couldn't handle and we were losing the ball a lot in our own half. Aside from that, I've left everything how it is with an attacking mentality. Occassionally if I'm playing against a passing side I'll tell the team to get stuck in, if the low crosses aren't working I'll change it to mixed crosses but seeing as we don't really have strong forwards I try to avoid that. Sometimes I've tried to stick work ball in the box on as the Raumdeuters get too often caught in the channels without much options available to them (except passing back to the wing-backs or midfielders).

The biggest problem I'm having is that we don't create many chances in the box. There's a fair few on the edge of the box, and a lot of our goals come from the wing backs finding a raumdeuter at the far post, but if a chance does come in the box the player is normally under a lot of pressure. We do tend to have a lot of possession (though not always), but it seems like teams can sit in front of us and we struggle to find space.

I'm starting to tear my hair out a bit here trying to figure out what's going wrong so any help is much appreciated!

[WayneRomney]

Kabaka, your attacking mentality will override the lower tempo I think.

The lack of chances inside the box is most definitely down to lack of (clever) movement from your front 3. As we are using a fairly similar system, and mine is creating heaps of chances, I'd say your choice of two RMDs upfront can be an issue. I'd also pay attention to the movement/positioning of your RPM in this system. See if he is "getting in the way" of other players. When I use a BWM next to my B2B midfielder the latter is always available for support of attacking play.

[HUNT3R]

Kabaka, your attacking mentality will override the lower tempo I think.

The tempo will just be a bit lower than the default high tempo.

[the_Kabaka]

What's causing the lack of 'clever' movement? Aren't the RMDs whole purpose that they're about 'clever' movement?

Hmmm, I'm not sure the RPM is the problem, he hasn't particularly shown himself to be getting in the way. If I used a BMW woulnd't that be a bit too defensive alongside wing-backs and a defensive midfielder?

I've gone for a slightly lower tempo to go with the short (mixed) passing. That being said, my players are technically capable, so if I increased the tempo, would this help me to penetrate opposition defences more easily?

[WayneRomney]

What's causing the lack of 'clever' movement? Aren't the RMDs whole purpose that they're about 'clever' movement?

Hmmm, I'm not sure the RPM is the problem, he hasn't particularly shown himself to be getting in the way. If I used a BMW woulnd't that be a bit too defensive alongside wing-backs and a defensive midfielder?

I've gone for a slightly lower tempo to go with the short (mixed) passing. That being said, my players are technically capable, so if I increased the tempo, would this help me to penetrate opposition defences more easily?

Increasing tempo to "normal" would probably help.

You have two forwards with the same role, is my point. The RMD is perhaps the most demanding wide role, so putting one of them as IF would probably help also - to give your attacking 3 some more diversion.

There is something in your tactic I don't understand tho. You have "retain possession" and "lower tempo". You want to play both possession and attacking? In this thread we have learned that playing with an attacking mentality doesn't necessarily mean we go gung-ho and constantly attack. Likewise, you can have a possession based, patient approach, that can create more shots on goal than this setup. I think your basic ideas are conflicting. I would have gone with one, excluding the other.

Regarding my midfield setup, I use pretty much the same tactic as option 2 in the OP. I changed this role to a BWM instead of a Regista, because initially I had no regista type players. Then I just continued with it because it gave me more defensive cover.

[alinp]

Increasing tempo to "normal" would probably help.

You have two forwards with the same role, is my point. The RMD is perhaps the most demanding wide role, so putting one of them as IF would probably help also - to give your attacking 3 some more diversion.

There is something in your tactic I don't understand tho. You have "retain possession" and "lower tempo". You want to play both possession and attacking? In this thread we have learned that playing with an attacking mentality doesn't necessarily mean we go gung-ho and constantly attack. Likewise, you can have a possession based, patient approach, that can create more shots on goal than this setup. I think your basic ideas are conflicting. I would have gone with one, excluding the other.

Regarding my midfield setup, I use pretty much the same tactic as option 2 in the OP. I changed this role to a BWM instead of a Regista, because initially I had no regista type players. Then I just continued with it because it gave me more defensive cover.

I concur - I don't see why your trying to lower the tempo (which is compounded by the Retain Possession TI) in an Attacking set up - just seems a little contrary to me.

Elsewhere, I think it's already been pointed out that having both wide AM's in Attack duty could make things a little congested in the box. The DLF(S) will still aim to get back into the box + both the BBM and the RPM will be heading that way too, so potentially you could have 5 heading for the box and your only support then is the DM. I'd suggest pulling back on one of the wide AM's making them a support duty and changing the RPM (or BBM if you like) to a role that you KNOW will support the attack - how about a DLP(S) if you want someone in the CM strata?

[alinp]

Also, unless you've got a good reason why, I'd tend not to go with a Stopper/Cover combo in a 2 man defence - keep it simple would be my call. In fact, I certainly wouldn't be playing a Stopper with a DM in front - a) not really a need and b) potential to go for the same ball possibly leaving an attacker free. 2 CD(D)'s should be fine.

[the_Kabaka]

Thanks, definite food for thought.

My thinking with the Attacking/possession combo was that on the whole I'd want us to play a possession game but if there was a riskier pass available my creative players wouldn't be afraid to take it. This is what I took out of the first few lines in Cleon's Art of Possession football, that a possession game and attacking football ARE NOT necessarily conflicting?

I'd suggest pulling back on one of the wide AM's making them a support duty and changing the RPM (or BBM if you like) to a role that you KNOW will support the attack - how about a DLP(S) if you want someone in the CM strata?

So that I'm clear on the above, are you saying you think the roaming playmaker is contributing to the congestion in the box and that a more 'supporting' player would help?

Also, unless you've got a good reason why, I'd tend not to go with a Stopper/Cover combo in a 2 man defence - keep it simple would be my call. In fact, I certainly wouldn't be playing a Stopper with a DM in front - a) not really a need and b) potential to go for the same ball possibly leaving an attacker free. 2 CD(D)'s should be fine.

Thanks I can see the point here.

[alinp]

Thanks, definite food for thought.

My thinking with the Attacking/possession combo was that on the whole I'd want us to play a possession game but if there was a riskier pass available my creative players wouldn't be afraid to take it. This is what I took out of the first few lines in Cleon's Art of Possession football, that a possession game and attacking football ARE NOT necessarily conflicting?

So that I'm clear on the above, are you saying you think the roaming playmaker is contributing to the congestion in the box and that a more 'supporting' player would help?

Indeed - Attacking and Possession aren't necessarily conflicting, BUT I don't think it's how you've done it. If you want an Attacking Possession tactic, my starting point would be to get the possession bit right first, then look to how you can make it more attacking. You seem to be trying to come at this from the other angle.

IMO, because the RPM in your tactic starts from higher than a Reg would, his forward movement will most likely find him higher up the pitch in attacking phases than the Reg. You can see from Cleon's screenshots that the Reg holds a nice supporting position (and still has 3 men behind him to mitigate the risk). I don't think you'd get the same positioning from an RPM in the CM strata, whereas something like a DLP(S) is more likely to hold a nice supporting position leaving your BBM free to drive into the box as and when appropriate.

[nick1408]

So, I've had a crack at creating a tactic based on both the opening posts and Rashidi's video. Nothing special but a start:

Wing backs are told to stay wider to help keep some width and keeper is told to slow down play so I can get my players back in position before distribution. It had inspiration from the opening post but my players are far more better suited to a narrow system than a wide system (I have no wingers/inside forwards). I figured I needed a DLF to create a supplier and a trequartista to help attract the ball/defenders and also act as another creator. I did try a false nine but felt that the trequartista and false nine occupied the same space too often to really create for the advanced forward or eachother.

Some screenshots from my second game:

Game Stats

Pretty even shots but the shots on target is the real winner here. By closing down so aggressively I limited Wolfsburg (4th to my 6th at this stage) to only 3 on target. Also, I was able to open them up for half of my shots to be clear cut chances with 0 long shots and no-one off side. What you may notice is the lack of possession. This doesn't worry me in an attacking tactic as (thanks to Cleon's previous threads) it is really about what you do with the possession. I was 0-3 up with only 37% and finished on 41%. One thing that does concern me is the completed passes. I would like this to be much higher but I think by playing such an aggressive system that it will lead to more mistakes as they try to move the ball so quick.

Player Stats

The biggest issue here is Davies mistakes. He is my second choice LWB and did earn a 9.0 match rating but 7 mistakes on his own compared to 8 for the rest of the team seems too much. He is only told to stay wide so shouldn't be making this many I feel. What also stood out is the CB's passing stats. I might look at this with something like changing them to plain CB's but I think I may lose too much in the buildup play.

Wolfsburg Blocked Shots

Look at hwere my defence made Wolfsburg shoot from. Mostly around the edge of the box and most even blocked from there.

Typical blocking move

This is a typical blocking move. Granted, this player is isolated but I always outnumbered them when they shot and forced the long shots anyway.

All in all, it seems there is plenty to work with.

[cyoung17]

I have to say, I feel the criticism of the attacking mentality with lower tempo isn't really valid. Dropping mentality towards the 'lower' end of the spectrum, yes, affects tempo but it also effects a number of things like forward runs, creative freedom, width etc etc. You can still play a lower tempo whilst having those things on the 'attacking' spectrum. It shouldn't be a byproduct of low tempo that you also must be more conservative.

[alinp]

I have to say, I feel the criticism of the attacking mentality with lower tempo isn't really valid.

I don't think anyone's said that.

[cyoung17]

"I concur - I don't see why your trying to lower the tempo (which is compounded by the Retain Possession TI) in an Attacking set up - just seems a little contrary to me".??

Apologies I missed your post following that statement.

[alinp]

"I concur - I don't see why your trying to lower the tempo (which is compounded by the Retain Possession TI) in an Attacking set up - just seems a little contrary to me".??

Apologies I missed your post following that statement.

No worries... IMO reducing the tempo of Cleon's initial set up kinda goes against it's core principles, which is basically what he was doing in his variation.

[cyoung17]

I'll stop after this as I don't mean to detract from the thread, it is just my opinion that lowering tempo doesn't go against any principles. Cleon himself in the OP says 'Even if you use the team instructions to tone things down, it will still be aggressive because attacking is the base you are creating it from' when talking about tempo. If the core principles are penetration, support, mobility, creativity and width then I think these can all be achieved with a lower tempo as long as the other aspects of your tactic are correct. The attacking mentality was chosen for this thread because people seem to struggle but it is worth mentioning that he says attacking football can be created from any mentality and the thread is the art of attacking football and not solely about the attacking mentality. I love these threads because they inspire creative thinking and there are so many ways to achieve a particular style of football. I'm just playing devils advocate

[alinp]

I'll stop after this as I don't mean to detract from the thread, it is just my opinion that lowering tempo doesn't go against any principles. Cleon himself in the OP says 'Even if you use the team instructions to tone things down, it will still be aggressive because attacking is the base you are creating it from' when talking about tempo. If the core principles are penetration, support, mobility, creativity and width then I think these can all be achieved with a lower tempo as long as the other aspects of your tactic are correct. The attacking mentality was chosen for this thread because people seem to struggle but it is worth mentioning that he says attacking football can be created from any mentality and the thread is the art of attacking football and not solely about the attacking mentality. I love these threads because they inspire creative thinking and there are so many ways to achieve a particular style of football. I'm just playing devils advocate

You are dead right of course... I have been known to reduce tempo in Attacking tactics myself, however I would tend to leave it as intended by the Mentality initially (if it ain't broke, n' all that) and adjust in game as required. Perhaps that could be an option for the_Kabaka ?

[tyro]

I just wanted to say. Thank you again for this. This thread together with RTH's and Rashidi's threads somehow made something click in my mind.

I tend to have many different saves but somehow I am now able to build a tactic that uses movement and works using the principles. I'm not winning everything of course but my teams are creating good chances and are moving around well. Many times, even just recently we were 1-0 behind but I was not worried because I saw the match and I knew it will go in. We ended up winning 2-1.

[the_Kabaka]

ok so I following everyone's advice, I changed the Raumdeteurs to inside forwards (Support), the right wing back to attack to take advantage of the space being left by the inside forward ahead of him cutting inside and in the hope the roaming playmaker next to him will find him out wide, and the deep lying forward to complete forward (support) to try and encourage him to join the attack more.

For TIs, i changed it to the below to try and get rid of some of the inconsistencies:

After going on an eight game unbeaten run, I started think I was getting somewhere but since then have won 1 in 5 in the league and struggled in 2 games in the FA CUP against Sheffield Wednesday.

I'm struggling to figure out why, maybe I'm now sitting to deep? But I didn't want to push up further in order not to crowd out the space now that we're playing a more direct game. One thing I've noticed though is almost all of my goals come from either set pieces or from one of the wing backs crossing to the back post for an incoming inside forward. I'm not creating many clear chances for my forward or scoring goals in many ways other than that?